检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:杜林哲 刘宇恺[2] 戈陈艳 DU Linzhe;LIU Yukai;GE Chenyan(Department of Pharmacy,Nanjing Hospital Affiliated to Nanjing Medical University(Nanjing First Hospital),Nanjing,Jiangsu210006,China;Department of Neurology,Nanjing Hospital Affiliated to Nanjing Medical University(Nanjing First Hospital),Nanjing,Jiangsu210006,China)
机构地区:[1]南京医科大学附属南京医院<南京市第一医院>药学部,江苏南京210006 [2]南京医科大学附属南京医院<南京市第一医院>神经内科,江苏南京210006
出 处:《医药前沿》2024年第27期14-17,26,共5页Journal of Frontiers of Medicine
基 金:江苏省药学会—奥赛康医院药学科研项目(A201908)。
摘 要:目的:调查临床药学专业学生药学叙事能力现状,探索相关教学模式。方法:2022年4—5月,通过问卷形式对江苏省某2所医药类大学临床药学专业学生进行调查。调查问卷包括基本信息、叙事能力、能力评估3部分,记录药学生叙事能力得分,并比较不同性别、年龄、选择药学专业原因及在本次调查前对叙事药学不同熟悉程度药学生的叙事能力得分差异。本研究共回收问卷112份,有效问卷105份,有效回收率为93.8%。结果:105名学生叙事药学能力4个维度平均得分(3.51±0.75)分,其中关注倾听、沟通回应、理解再现及反思评价平均得分为(2.99±0.95)、(3.52±0.69)、(3.67±0.56)及(3.69±0.72)分。相比于女性而言,男性药学生在沟通回应、理解再现与自我评价维度上得分更高;在选择药学专业原因上,个人兴趣或推荐的药学生在关注倾听维度上得分低于专业调剂或其他原因,而在自我评价维度得分高于专业调剂或其他原因;在本次调查前对叙事药学熟悉程度上,从未接触的药学生在沟通回应和理解再现维度上得分低于听说过或熟悉的药学生,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:临床药学专业学生叙事能力处于中等水平,其中关注倾听维度得分显著低于其他维度,未来在临床药学教育中可考虑增加叙事药学相关内容。Objective To investigate the current situation of pharmacognostic narrative ability in clinical pharmacy and explore the related teaching mode.Methods From April to May 2022,The students majoring in clinical pharmacy in two pharmaceutical universities in Jiangsu Province were investigated by questionnaire.The questionnaire includes three parts:basic information,narrative ability and ability assessment.The differences in narrative ability scores of students with different gender,age,reasons for choosing pharmacy major and different degrees of familiarity with narrative pharmacy before this survey were compared.A total of 112 questionnaires were collected,105 were valid,and the effective recovery rate was 93.8%.Results The average score of 105 students in four dimensions of narrative pharmacy ability was(3.51±0.75),among which the average scores of attentive listening,communication response,comprehension and reflection evaluation were(2.99±0.95),(3.52±0.69),(3.67±0.56)and(3.69±0.72).Compared with female students,male students scored higher in communication response,comprehension representation and self�evaluation.In terms of the reasons for choosing pharmacy major,students with personal interest or recommendation scored lower in the dimension of attention and listening than those for professional adjustment or other reasons,but higher in the dimension of self-evaluation.In terms of familiarity with narrative pharmacy before this survey,the scores of the students who had never been exposed to it were lower than those who had heard of it or were familiar with it in the dimensions of communication response and understanding reproduction,with statistical significance(P<0.05).Conclusions The narrative ability of clinical medicine students is at a medium level,and the score of attention listening dimension is significantly lower than that of other dimensions.In the future,narrative pharmacy should be added to clinical pharmacy education.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.49